[silicon2401]

> There's absolutely no reason to assume it's true.

I think that's backwards. There's no reason to assume an experience like love can't be replicated by reproducing the same events in the brain. Unless you believe in the supernatural like souls, in which case the conversation is no longer based on scientific analysis.

> BTW, love/affection/contact is one of those aspects of life where you're not a brain in a jar.

This is a non sequitur. The point of the brain in a jar idea is that you have no way to tell that you're a brain in a jar if all the chemicals, electrical impulses, etc are properly manipulated.

[tgv]

I did not assume it, but apparently you took "brain in a jar" literal. That completely invalidates any argument, since the Chinese you're talking about, are not brains in a jar.

> There's no reason to assume an experience like love can't be replicated

There's all the reason, if only because a "brain in a jar" lacks organs for hormone production (e.g., adrenaline and testosterone). And no, you even haven't got an idea of how create an artificial adrenal gland or scrotum, and how to hook them up to an brain in a jar. There's all the reason to assume it can't be easily replicated.

And even if it could theoretically be replicated, there's absolutely no reason to assume Xiaoice can do that.

[silicon2401]

I think you're missing my point. I'm only talking about the users. If something could in theory effect the same result in their brains that normal love does, then I personally would be all for it. Maybe we're not there yet, but I'm talking about the principle rather than any specific implementation.